From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f200.google.com (mail-pf0-f200.google.com [209.85.192.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE586B0069 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 06:00:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f200.google.com with SMTP id w128so187987842pfd.3 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 03:00:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com. [217.140.101.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s9si22050488pfi.100.2016.08.22.03.00.50 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 03:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:00:45 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] arm64 Kconfig: Select gigantic page Message-ID: <20160822100045.GA26494@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1471834603-27053-1-git-send-email-xieyisheng1@huawei.com> <1471834603-27053-3-git-send-email-xieyisheng1@huawei.com> <20160822080358.GF13596@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160822080358.GF13596@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Xie Yisheng , mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dave.hansen@intel.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, guohanjun@huawei.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mike.kravetz@oracle.com On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:03:58AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 22-08-16 10:56:43, Xie Yisheng wrote: > > Arm64 supports gigantic page after > > commit 084bd29810a5 ("ARM64: mm: HugeTLB support.") > > however, it got broken by > > commit 944d9fec8d7a ("hugetlb: add support for gigantic page > > allocation at runtime") > > > > This patch selects ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE to make this > > function can be used again. > > I haven't double checked that the above commit really broke it but if > that is the case then > > Fixes: 944d9fec8d7a ("hugetlb: add support for gigantic page allocation at runtime") > > would be nice as well I guess. I do not think that marking it for stable > is really necessary considering how long it's been broken and nobody has > noticed... I'm not sure that commit broke it. The gigantic functionality introduced by the above commit was under an #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64. Prior to that we had a VM_BUG_ON(hstate_is_gigantic(h)). -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org